MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Building Real Time Edge Machine Learning Systems for High Data Rate Acquisition

2023· article· en· W4389666503 on OpenAlexaff
Mohammad Mehdi Rahimifar, Quentin Wingering, Berthié Gouin-Ferland, Ryan Coffee, Audrey Corbeil Therrien

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicAdvanced Optical Sensing Technologies
Canadian institutionsInstitut interdisciplinaire d'innovation technologiqueUniversité de Sherbrooke
Fundersnot available
KeywordsComputer scienceField-programmable gate arrayEnhanced Data Rates for GSM EvolutionComputationEdge computingEdge deviceReal-time computingInstrumentation (computer programming)DetectorLatency (audio)PixelBandwidth (computing)Computer hardwareArtificial intelligenceAlgorithmCloud computingOperating system

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Over the past decade, a developments in radiation and photonic detectors has significantly improved their resolution, pixel density, sensitivity, and sampling rate. The increase in sampling rate corresponds to a considerable increase in generated data, the movement and storage of which requires a large number of storage units with very high bandwidth interconnects to the sensors themselves. The paradigm of edge computing, however, proposes to move the data processing closer to the source, the edge, rather than moving data to processing. Still, the computation resources are limited at the edge and it is necessary to use lean and robust algorithms. Machine learning (ML) is commonly used to identify patterns and relationships in minimally processed data. EdgeML is a combination of ML and edge computing that leverages a combination of benefits from ML algorithms and edge computing. In this paper, we demonstrate a high-speed and configurable ML model in a fully customizable EdgeML flow. Our demonstration focuses on an angular streaking detector developed for the LCLS-II project known as the CookieBox. The flow starts by emulating the CookieBox, digitizing the signals, and passing them to an optimized ML model on the FPGA. By using our ML implementation in this flow, we are able to achieve a 2.7 μs of inference latency. This flow can also be configured for other instrumentation applications that require low-latency solutions.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.911
Threshold uncertainty score0.351

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.027
GPT teacher head0.292
Teacher spread0.265 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designSimulation or modeling
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations0
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicAdvanced Optical Sensing TechnologiesFrench-language works237,207